[Carl in Tampa]

Originally Posted by John_W

Carl, as a former law enforcement officer and you seem to be following this story closely. I've been out all afternoon, but before I left about noon I was watching CNN and one of their reporters was going into the terrorist apartment. They said it was released by the FBI and the landlord had given CNN permission first to enter.

The reporter was making note of the many items spread out on the bed that apparently the FBI had looked over. What was somewhat puzzling was the CNN studio expert said he is surprised there is no fingerprint powder anywhere in the place. They scanned the camera around and it didn't appear to have been dusted. He said he was shocked, because they should want to know who else had been there. Also, he was surprised it had been released back to the landlord so quickly, he said normally they will pay the rent and keep the place as long as it's needed in case they need to return, if and when new information comes to light. What's your take on all of this? Any other experts hear anything else?

I believe that the Search Warrant on the house was served by the FBI. I'm sure they sent in several Crime Scene Technicians to facilitate getting the search completed more quickly. I'm confident that they were quite thorough.

At the point where they executed the Search Warrant "Return" which lists the evidence items seized, they released the location back to the owner. This is customary.

A significant issue is the "probable cause" for the search warrant. It was probably to obtain evidence that the suspects who were killed in the police chase were the residents of the house and had the means to commit the crime of murder. That doesn't mean that they can search for "just anything," but rather for evidence that links the suspects to the crime of murder that they were "suspected" of having committed. Remember that at this early stage no one was willing to use the word "terrorist."

The items on the bed that the searchers had "apparently looked over" must not have had value related to the investigation. Since it was not a terrorist investigation, there were limits on how thorough the search could be.

The "strange men" who came on the property went to the garage, where much of the bomb material was found. Perhaps that area was dusted for fingerprints.

The media is full of "experts" who frequently talk through their hats. These are also the people who don't seem to know the difference between "automatic" firearms and "semi-automatic" firearms, or the difference between "clips" and "magazines." That doesn't keep them from spouting off.

Having said all that, the family of the deceased might have a good civil lawsuit against the owner of the property for allowing the press into the house if the rent was still paid up to date, violating the privacy of the six-month old child and the mother of the shooter, who also resided in the house.

[Carl in Tampa]

Originally Posted by graciegirl
... Religion, any religion is wrong if it kills.

Originally Posted by twinklesweep

Presumably this holds true for the Christian Crusades, the cry of which was "Kill them all. God will know his own!" The "all" were primarily Muslims.

Is it any wonder that the jihadists refer to Westerners as "crusaders" in their social media messages? Is it possible that memories like this just don't go away?

Just sayin' (that is, not intending this point as justification...).

Two things:

1. Graciegirl overlooks the Roman Catholic doctrine of the just (as opposed to unjust) war. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, in paragraphs 2302-2317, authoritatively teaches what constitutes the just defense of a nation against an aggressor.

Called the Just War Doctrine, it was first enunciated by St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD). Over the centuries it was taught by Doctors of the Church, such as St. Thomas Aquinas, and formally embraced by the Magisterium, which has also adapted it to the situation of modern warfare. This doctrine is generally observed by non-Catholic groups as well.

2. People who believe that Muslims have some justification for thinking that modern killing of Christians has some relationship to the Crusades do not understand the history of the Crusades.

The Crusades were the Christian push-back against Muslim expansionism, which had spread the Muslim religion BY THE SWORD across all of North Africa on the south side of the Mediterranean Sea and across the north shore of the Mediterranean all the way to Spain. (That's why Spain has so much "Moorish" architecture.)

If this push-back had not been mounted, all of Europe would be Muslim today. The Muslims, not the Crusaders, were the aggressors.

[Taltarzac725]

Just War Theory | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

You may want to look at this on the Just War in Philosophy.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by Carl in Tampa

Originally Posted by graciegirl
... Religion, any religion is wrong if it kills.



Two things:

1. Graciegirl overlooks the Roman Catholic doctrine of the just (as opposed to unjust) war. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, in paragraphs 2302-2317, authoritatively teaches what constitutes the just defense of a nation against an aggressor.

Called the Just War Doctrine, it was first enunciated by St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD). Over the centuries it was taught by Doctors of the Church, such as St. Thomas Aquinas, and formally embraced by the Magisterium, which has also adapted it to the situation of modern warfare. This doctrine is generally observed by non-Catholic groups as well.

2. People who believe that Muslims have some justification for thinking that modern killing of Christians has some relationship to the Crusades do not understand the history of the Crusades.

The Crusades were the Christian push-back against Muslim expansionism, which had spread the Muslim religion BY THE SWORD across all of North Africa on the south side of the Mediterranean Sea and across the north shore of the Mediterranean all the way to Spain. (That's why Spain has so much "Moorish" architecture.)

If this push-back had not been mounted, all of Europe would be Muslim today. The Muslims, not the Crusaders, were the aggressors.

You are completely and absolutely right.


I am more concerned however with what is happening today and in today's world. I am more concerned with people who are not concerned with what is happening today in today's world. The civil war and the crusades are gone. We have the folks who live on this earth at this time doing things that are far from fair or justified.


I do NOT believe both of those people were mentally ill and I don't think it was work place violence. I think that there exists a growing new form to a religion that thinks folks who don't belong to it should die.

[Justus]

In the wake of this terrorist massacre, our Attorney General Loretta Lynch, in speaking to the muslim community, has vowed to "crack down on free speech, if necessary", in order to forestall any "anti-muslim backlash", which she described as her "greatest fear." This is our government's response to terrorism on American soil.

So much for the victims...so much for the Christians and Jews...so much for our Constitutional rights.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by Justus

In the wake of this terrorist massacre, our Attorney General Loretta Lynch, in speaking to the muslim community, has vowed to "crack down on free speech, if necessary", in order to forestall any "anti-muslim backlash", which she described as her "greatest fear." This is our government's response to terrorism on American soil.

So much for the victims...so much for the Christians and Jews...so much for our Constitutional rights.

I can see it getting way out of hand. Especially with the 2016 elections coming up.

I do read a lot of history and some of the worst moments in our history come from fear and bigotry fueled by politicians trying to get votes or somehow increase their power base. Bridge of Spies teaches some very good lessons about this. Movies can teach respect for our US Constitution and the values it has. A lot of the Founder Fathers worried about politicians who did not have enough checks-and-balances on them. They had read a lot of Roman history which is full of politicians misusing the passions of people.

No two victims feel the same about stuff so I do not think anyone speaks for them. They should be able to speak for themselves though. If a politician starts speaking for the victims, I get very suspicious of his or her motives.

[DeanFL]

Originally Posted by Justus

In the wake of this terrorist massacre, our Attorney General Loretta Lynch, in speaking to the muslim community, has vowed to "crack down on free speech, if necessary", in order to forestall any "anti-muslim backlash", which she described as her "greatest fear." This is our government's response to terrorism on American soil.

So much for the victims...so much for the Christians and Jews...so much for our Constitutional rights.

-----------------------

I heard her say this too. Immediately went to the bathroom to get my earwax removal kit and flushed. Was sure THIS could not have been said in public by her...but no wax...

It's like Bizzaro World in the White House communications - everything's 180 degrees out of synch. Guess we'd better watch our language and follow their PC rule. Don't want the Fed Hate Police to lock us up = 1984.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by DeanFL

-----------------------

I heard her say this too. Immediately went to the bathroom to get my earwax removal kit and flushed. Was sure THIS could not have been said in public by her...but no wax...

It's like Bizzaro World in the White House communications - everything's 180 degrees out of synch. Guess we'd better watch our language and follow their PC rule. Don't want the Fed Hate Police to lock us up = 1984.

I doubt if she would use the government to come after someone saying something nasty about Muslims on Facebook, TOTV, or elsewhere. She seems to be talking about certain politicians who use hateful rhetoric to stir up their voting base. These people make things worse with respect to preventing further violence. They are often very dishonest in what they say too.

Some might find this interesting-- https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org...bout-Just-War/

[DeanFL]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

I doubt if she would use the government to come after someone saying something nasty about Muslims on Facebook, TOTV, or elsewhere. She seems to be talking about certain politicians who use hateful rhetoric to stir up their voting base. These people make things worse with respect to preventing further violence. They are often very dishonest in what they say too.

Some might find this interesting-- https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org...bout-Just-War/

----------------------------

We'll simply allow her words in quotes to stand for themselves. BUT - if WE 'see something-say something'.... WE may be prosecuted. And what does "edges towards violence" mean? Gray and murky talk for an ATTY GEN.

As for that term - what about the Imans that preach hate toward US citizens in Mosques ON OUR SHORES. IS THAT THE SAME???
As I said BIZARRO.

her words:

The day after a horrific shooting spree by what appears to be a radicalized Muslim man and his partner in San Bernardino, California, Attorney General Loretta Lynch pledged to a Muslim advocacy and lobbying group that she would take aggressive action against anyone who used "anti-Muslim rhetoric" that "edges toward violence."

Speaking to the audience at the Muslim Advocates' 10th anniversary dinner Thursday, Lynch said her "greatest fear" is the "incredibly disturbing rise of anti-Muslim rhetoric" in America and vowed to prosecute any guilty of what she deemed violence-inspiring speech.

"Now obviously this is a country that is based on free speech, but when it edges towards violence, when we see the potential for someone lifting that mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric�or, as we saw after 9/11, violence directed at individuals who may not even be Muslims but perceived to be Muslims, and they will suffer just as much�when we see that we will take action," said Lynch.

After touting the numbers of "investigations into acts of anti-Muslim hatred" and "bigoted actions" against Muslims launched by her DOJ, Lynch suggested the Constitution does not protect "actions predicated on violent talk" and pledged to prosecute those responsible for such actions.

�I think it�s important that as we again talk about the importance of free speech we make it clear that actions predicated on violent talk are not America," said Lynch. "They are not who we are, they are not what we do, and they will be prosecuted."

Assuring the pro-Muslim group that "we stand with you," Lynch said she would use her Justice Department to protect Muslims from "violence" and discrimination.

[Bogie Shooter]

[QUOTE=Justus;1154687]In the wake of this terrorist massacre, our Attorney General Loretta Lynch, in speaking to the muslim community, has vowed to "crack down on free speech, if necessary", in order to forestall any "anti-muslim backlash", which she described as her "greatest fear." This is our government's response to terrorism on American soil.

So much for the victims...so much for the Christians and Jews...so much for our Constitutional rights.[/QUOTE]

Does that apply to the "press" invading that apartment?

[Fredman]

What is she going to do to all those who speak and direct violence toward policemen

[Justus]

Originally Posted by twinklesweep

Presumably this holds true for the Christian Crusades, the cry of which was "Kill them all. God will know his own!" The "all" were primarily Muslims.

Is it any wonder that the jihadists refer to Westerners as "crusaders" in their social media messages? Is it possible that memories like this just don't go away?

Just sayin' (that is, not intending this point as justification...).

This is all factually (and historically) correct and verifiable:

In 732 A.D., the Muslim Army, which was moving on Paris, was defeated and turned back at Tours, France, by Charles Martell. (Charlemagne)

In 1571 A.D., the Muslim Army/Navy was defeated by the Italians and Austrians as they tried to cross the Mediterranean to attack southern Europe in the Battle of Lepanto.

In 1683 A.D., the Turkish Muslim Army, attacking Eastern Europe, was finally defeated in the Battle of Vienna by German and Polish Christian Armies.

If these battles had not been won, we might be speaking Arabic and Christianity could be non-existent; Judaism certainly would not exist.


Do you remember?:

1. In 1968, Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by a Muslim male.

2. In 1972, at the Munich Olympics, Israeli athletes were kidnapped and massacred by Muslim males.

3. In 1972, a PanAm 747 was hijacked and eventually diverted to Cairo where a fuse was lit on final approach. Shortly after landing it was blown up by Muslim males.

4. In 1973, a PanAm 707 was destroyed in Rome, with 33 people killed, when it was attacked with grenades by Muslim males.

5. In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by Muslim males.

6. During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by Muslim males.

7. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by Muslim males.

8. In 1985, the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70-year old Jewish American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by Muslim males.

9. In 1985, TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a US Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by Muslim males.

10. In 1988, PanAm Flight 103 was bombed by Muslim males.

11. In 1993, the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by Muslim males.

12. In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by Muslim males.

13. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take down the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers. Thousands of people were killed by Muslim males.

14. In 2002, the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against Muslim males.

15. In 2002, reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and beheaded by - you guessed it - a Muslim male. (Plus two other American journalists were just recently beheaded).

16. In 2013, the Boston Marathon Bombing resulted in 4 Innocent people, including a child, being killed plus 264 people injured by Muslim males.

[goodtimesintv]

Originally Posted by Justus

This is all factually (and historically) correct and verifiable:

In 732 A.D., the Muslim Army, which was moving on Paris, was defeated and turned back at Tours, France, by Charles Martell. (Charlemagne)

In 1571 A.D., the Muslim Army/Navy was defeated by the Italians and Austrians as they tried to cross the Mediterranean to attack southern Europe in the Battle of Lepanto.

In 1683 A.D., the Turkish Muslim Army, attacking Eastern Europe, was finally defeated in the Battle of Vienna by German and Polish Christian Armies.

If these battles had not been won, we might be speaking Arabic and Christianity could be non-existent; Judaism certainly would not exist.


Do you remember?:

1. In 1968, Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by a Muslim male.

2. In 1972, at the Munich Olympics, Israeli athletes were kidnapped and massacred by Muslim males.

3. In 1972, a PanAm 747 was hijacked and eventually diverted to Cairo where a fuse was lit on final approach. Shortly after landing it was blown up by Muslim males.

4. In 1973, a PanAm 707 was destroyed in Rome, with 33 people killed, when it was attacked with grenades by Muslim males.

5. In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by Muslim males.

6. During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by Muslim males.

7. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by Muslim males.

8. In 1985, the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70-year old Jewish American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by Muslim males.

9. In 1985, TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a US Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by Muslim males.

10. In 1988, PanAm Flight 103 was bombed by Muslim males.

11. In 1993, the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by Muslim males.

12. In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by Muslim males.

13. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take down the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers. Thousands of people were killed by Muslim males.

14. In 2002, the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against Muslim males.

15. In 2002, reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and beheaded by - you guessed it - a Muslim male. (Plus two other American journalists were just recently beheaded).

16. In 2013, the Boston Marathon Bombing resulted in 4 Innocent people, including a child, being killed plus 264 people injured by Muslim males.

We know these are the things that matter, but you might as well talk to the floor.

They do not want to hear.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by goodtimesintv

We know these are the things that matter, but you might as well talk to the floor.

They do not want to hear.

Radicalized Muslim males and some females did these things for the most part. Islam is one of the largest religions in the world with most adherents being peaceful. At War With Whom?: A short history of radical Islam :: Middle East Forum

[Justus]

GoodTimesInTV, Sadly, I believe you're right, which brings back the phrase, "...and then they came for me."